Assessment of nivolumab benefit-risk profile of a 240-mg flat dose relative to a 3-mg/kg dosing regimen in patients with advanced tumors

Retrospective comparison of a weight-based dose every 2 weeks with a fixed dose every month: a real-life analysis of nivolumab in the treatment of advanced melanoma

Nivolumab was first authorized at a weight-based dose (WBD) of 3 mg/kg every two weeks (Q2W). Since 2017, a fixed dose (FD) regimen [first 240 mg Q2W and then 480 mg per month (Q4W)] was allowed. The objective of the study was to compare a WBD regimen and an FD regimen with regard to effectiveness and safety. We conducted a single-center, retrospective, real-life study of consecutive adult patients who had received a WBD of nivolumab or an FD of 480 mg Q4W. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of grade ≥3 immune-related adverse events (irAEs). The secondary endpoints were overall survival and cost of the treatment. In all, 342 patients were included: 71 in the WBD cohort and 271 in the FD cohort. Of these patients, 201 patients (59.6%) experienced an irAE, and 24 of these events were graded as ≥3. At 12 months, there was no significant difference in irAE occurrence between the two cohorts [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval): 0.54 (0.21-1.36), P  = 0.19]. The 12-month overall survival rate was significantly lower in the WBD cohort ( P  < 0.001). Switching from a fortnightly weight dose to a fixed monthly dose halves the cost of hospitalization. Our results did not show a significant difference between WBD and FD cohort in the occurrence of severe irAEs. However overall survival appeared to be significantly higher in FD group. Some clinical trials are investigating a hybrid dosing regimen in which a WBD is capped by an FD. The present results need to be confirmed in prospective studies.

Population pharmacokinetics of adebrelimab - Support of alternative flat dose regimen in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer

Adebrelimab, a novel anti-PD-L1 antibody, has been approved by the National Medical Products Administration of China as an intravenous infusion for use in combination with carboplatin and etoposide as first-line treatment for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer in 2023. A two-compartment model with empirical time-varying CL for adebrelimab was established based on data from 263 patients receiving body weight-based doses from two clinical studies. Significant covariate effects of baseline body weight, albumin levels, tumor size, neutrophil counts, and presence of anti-drug antibodies were identified on CL of debrelimab, none of which were clinically significant or warranted dose adjustment. The degree of decrease in CL was higher in patients who responded to treatment with adebrelimab than in non-responders. Adebrelimab exposures (AUC, Ctrough, or Cmax) were not identified as a statistically significant factor related to efficacy or safety endpoint in the exposure-response analysis. Distribution of simulated exposure metrics from the flat dose regimen (1200 mg q3w) was similar to the marketed weight-based dosing regimen (20 mg/kg q3w), supporting the alternative flat dose regimen in the clinic.

Utility and impact of quantitative pharmacology on dose selection and clinical development of immuno-oncology therapy

Immuno-oncology (IO) therapies have changed the cancer treatment landscape. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have improved overall survival in 20-40% of patients with malignancies that were previously refractory. Due to the uniqueness in biology, modalities and patient responses, drug development strategies for IO differed from that traditionally used for cytotoxic and target therapies in oncology, and quantitative pharmacology utilizing modeling approach can be applied in all phases of the development process. In this review, we used case studies to showcase how various modeling methodologies were applied from translational science and dose selection through to label change, using examples that included anti-programmed-death-1 (anti-PD-1), anti-programmed-death ligand-1 (anti-PD-L1), anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (anti-CTLA-4), and anti-glucocorticoid-induced tumor necrosis factor receptor-related protein (anti-GITR) antibodies. How these approaches were utilized to support phase I-III dose selection, the design of phase III trials, and regulatory decisions on label change are discussed to illustrate development strategies. Model-based quantitative approaches have positively impacted IO drug development, and a better understanding of the biology and exposure-response relationship may benefit the development and optimization of new IO therapies.

Challenging the Norm: A Multidisciplinary Perspective on Intravenous to Subcutaneous Bridging Strategies for Biologics

The transition from intravenous (i.v.) to subcutaneous (s.c.) administration of biologics is a critical strategy in drug development aimed at improving patient convenience, compliance, and therapeutic outcomes. Focusing on the increasing role of model-informed drug development (MIDD) in the acceleration of this transition, an in-depth overview of the essential clinical pharmacology, and regulatory considerations for successful i.v. to s.c. bridging for biologics after the i.v. formulation has been approved are presented. Considerations encompass multiple aspects beginning with adequate pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (i.e., exposure-response) evaluations which play a vital role in establishing comparability between the i.v. and s.c. routes of administrations. Selected key recommendations and points to consider include: (i) PK characterization of the s.c. formulation, supported by the increasing preclinical understanding of the s.c. absorption, and robust PK study design and analyses in humans; (ii) a thorough characterization of the exposure-response profiles including important metrics of exposure for both efficacy and safety; (iii) comparability studies designed to meet regulatory considerations and support approval of the s.c. formulation, including noninferiority studies with PK and/or efficacy and safety as primary end points; and (iv) comprehensive safety package addressing assessments of immunogenicity and patients' safety profile with the new route of administration. Recommendations for successful bridging strategies are evolving and MIDD approaches have been used successfully to accelerate the transition to s.c. dosing, ultimately leading to improved patient experiences, adherence, and clinical outcomes.

A real-world study on the safety profile of extended-interval dosing of immune checkpoint inhibitors for melanoma: a single-center analysis in Japan

Background

Anti-programmed death-1 (PD-1) antibodies are the mainstay for the treatment of unresectable or high-risk melanoma. However, real-world data on the safety profile of their extended-interval doses (EDs) are limited, particularly in Asian patients with melanoma.

Materials and methods

In this single-center retrospective study, we analyzed the risks of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) among 71 Japanese patients (36 males; mean age, 65.0 years) who received anti-PD-1 monotherapy for melanoma at our institute. Patients who were administered ipilimumab prior to anti-PD-1 monotherapy were excluded. Patients were divided into three groups: canonical-interval dose (CD) group (n = 50, body weight-based dosing or 240 mg Q2W for nivolumab and body weight-based dosing or 200 mg Q3W for pembrolizumab), ED group (n = 14, 480 mg Q4W for nivolumab and 400 mg Q6W for pembrolizumab), and dose-switch (DS) group (n = 7, upfront CD followed by ED).

Results

The CD group received nivolumab more frequently in the metastatic setting. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics among the three groups, including in sex, age, primary tumor site, tumor subtype, and follow-up period. irAEs occurred in 36.6% (26 patients) of all patients (32.0% of the CD group, 35.7% of the ED group, and 71.4% of the DS group), while severe (grade ≥ 3) irAEs occurred in only two patients, both of whom were in the CD group. Most of the irAEs occurred during the first 6 months of anti-PD-1 therapy and, interestingly, all of the irAEs in the DS group occurred before the switch (during the CD). There was no significant difference among the three groups in the probability of irAE estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method.

Conclusion

These findings may highlight the safety of ED of anti-PD-1 monotherapy in the treatment of Asian patients with melanoma.

Comparison of clinical safety between standard versus extended interval dosing of immune checkpoint inhibitors: a real-world retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Extended interval dosing (ED) for inhibitors of programmed cell death protein 1 (anti-PD-1) (nivolumab, pembrolizumab) or its ligand (anti-PD-L1) (durvalumab) were recently approved based on pharmacokinetic model results that predicted a benefit-risk profile comparable with the standard dosing (SD) regimen. However, safety data in real-world condition of use are lacking. The objective was to compare the incidence and the risk factors of serious immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and any-grade irAEs between the SD and ED regimens in patients treated with anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

IrAEs were assessed from medical records in all new users of nivolumab, pembrolizumab, or durvalumab between 1 January 2019 and 31 December 2020 across two oncology centers in France. The incidence of irAEs was compared between both dosing regimens using Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for the main available confounders.

RESULTS

Among 686 patients included, 63% were new users of an SD regimen, 14% of ED regimen, and 23% started with SD and switched to ED regimen during follow-up. Overall, 34.6% of patients experienced at least one irAE of any grade and 11.4% presented at least one serious grade ≥3 irAE. No statistical difference was found between the SD and ED regimen on the risk of grade ≥3 irAEs [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-2.76] but our results suggest an increased risk of any-grade irAEs with the ED regimen (adjusted HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.00-2.12, P = 0.048). IrAEs resolved without sequelae in 46.4% of cases, and they were fatal for three patients (0.4%). Autoimmune pre-existing condition was confirmed as a risk factor for grade ≥3 irAEs (HR 2.56, 95% CI 1.53-4.27) and for all-grade irAEs (HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.17-2.20).

CONCLUSIONS

In a real-world setting, according to the regimen chosen by the oncologist based on clinical characteristics, we did not observe an increase in grade ≥3 irAE incidence between the SD and ED regimens.

Utilization and toxicity patterns of 2-weekly (Q2W) versus 4-weekly (Q4W) nivolumab for treatment of adjuvant and metastatic melanoma at BC cancer

BACKGROUND

Nivolumab, an immune checkpoint inhibitor used to treat several malignancies, is associated with immune-related adverse events (IrAEs). Original dosing for melanoma was 3 mg/kg (maximum 240 mg) every 2 weeks (Q2W). Based on simulation studies depicting similar efficacy and toxicity to original dosing, extended interval dosing of 6 mg/kg (maximum 480 mg) every 4 weeks (Q4W) was introduced.

OBJECTIVE

This study will compare safety between Q2W and Q4W dosing at BC Cancer in melanoma patients.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review for reported incidence, onset, and severity of IrAEs in melanoma patients treated with nivolumab Q2W and Q4W dosing was completed. Fisher's test was conducted for first incidence IrAEs using Microsoft Excel.

RESULTS

Seventy-one patients were identified (Q2W n = 35, Q4W n = 36). Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. No statistically significant difference was found in incidence of IrAEs between Q2W and Q4W dosing (Q2W 40% vs Q4W 50%, p = 0.477). Rash was most common (Q2W 79% vs Q4W 50%) followed by hypothyroidism (Q2W 33% vs Q4W 20%). Median onset of IrAEs seemed later with Q4W dosing (Q2W cycle 1 vs Q4W cycle 4). Regardless of dosing, most IrAEs were grade 1-2 in severity (Q2W 100% vs Q4W 89%).

CONCLUSION

Q4W dosing is associated with comparable incidence and potentially later onset of IrAEs compared to Q2W dosing. Most IrAEs in both dosing groups were similar and mild. Therefore, Q4W dosing offers a safe alternative to Q2W dosing while providing benefits including decreased workload for staff, decreased clinic visits, and viral exposure by patients.

First-Line, Fixed-Duration Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab Followed by Nivolumab in Clinically Diverse Patient Populations With Unresectable Stage III or IV Melanoma: CheckMate 401

PURPOSE

To address the paucity of data in patients with historically poor outcomes, we conducted the single-arm phase IIIb CheckMate 401 study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of nivolumab plus ipilimumab followed by nivolumab monotherapy in clinically diverse patient populations with advanced melanoma.

METHODS

Treatment-naive patients with unresectable stage III-IV melanoma received nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks (four doses) followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg (240 mg following a protocol amendment) once every 2 weeks for ≤24 months. The primary end point was the incidence of grade 3-5 select treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Overall survival (OS) was a secondary end point. Outcomes were evaluated in subgroups defined by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS), brain metastasis status, and melanoma subtype.

RESULTS

In total, 533 patients received at least one dose of study drug. Grade 3-5 select TRAEs affecting the GI (16%), hepatic (15%), endocrine (11%), skin (7%), renal (2%), and pulmonary (1%) systems occurred in the all-treated population; similar incidence rates were observed across all subgroups. At 21.6 months' median follow-up, 24-month OS rates were 63% in the all-treated population, 44% in the ECOG PS 2 subgroup (including patients with cutaneous melanoma only), 71% in the brain metastasis subgroup, 36% in the ocular/uveal melanoma subgroup, and 38% in the mucosal melanoma subgroup.

CONCLUSION

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab followed by nivolumab monotherapy was tolerable in patients with advanced melanoma and poor prognostic characteristics. Efficacy was similar between the all-treated population and patients with brain metastases. Reduced efficacy was observed in patients with ECOG PS 2, ocular/uveal melanoma, and/or mucosal melanoma, highlighting the continued need for novel treatment options for these difficult-to-treat patients.

Exposure-response analysis for nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (CheckMate 040)

This analysis was conducted to inform dose selection of a combination of nivolumab plus ipilimumab for the treatment of sorafenib-experienced patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). CheckMate 040 is an open-label, multicohort, phase I/II trial in adults with advanced HCC that evaluated nivolumab monotherapy (0.1-10 mg/kg once every 2 weeks [q2w]) and the following three combinations of nivolumab plus ipilimumab: (1) nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks (q3w) for four doses, followed by nivolumab monotherapy 240 mg q2w (arm A); (2) nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg q3w for four doses, followed by nivolumab monotherapy 240 mg q2w (arm B); and (3) nivolumab 3 mg/kg q2w plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks continuously (arm C). Exposure-response relationships (efficacy and safety) were characterized using nivolumab and ipilimumab concentrations after the first dose (Cavg1) as the exposure measure. Objective tumor response (OTR) and overall survival (OS) improvements were associated with increased ipilimumab exposure (OTR: odds ratio 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-1.86; OS: hazard ratio 0.86, 95% CI 0.75-0.98), but not nivolumab exposure (OTR: odds ratio 0.99, 95% CI 0.97-1.02; OS: hazard ratio 1.08, 95% CI 0.89-1.32). Hepatic treatment-related and immune-mediated adverse events were more common in arm A than in arms B or C. Nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg q3w for four doses, followed by nivolumab monotherapy 240 mg q2w had the most favorable benefit:risk profile in patients with advanced HCC.

Therapeutic drug monitoring of immune checkpoint inhibitors: based on their pharmacokinetic properties and biomarkers

As a new means of oncology treatment, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can improve survival rates in patients with resistant or refractory tumors. However, there are obvious inter-individual differences in the unsatisfactory response rate, drug resistance rate and the occurrence of immune-related adverse events (irAE). These questions have sparked interest in researchers looking for a way to screen sensitive populations and predict efficacy and safety. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is a way to ensure the safety and effectiveness of medication by measuring the concentration of drugs in body fluids and adjusting the medication regimen. It has the potential to be an adjunctive means of predicting the safety and efficacy of ICIs treatment. In this review, the author outlined the pharmacokinetic (PK) characteristics of ICIs in patients. The feasibility and limitations of TDM of ICIs were discussed by summarizing the relationships between the pharmacokinetic parameters and the efficacy, toxicity and biomarkers.

Nivolumab combination therapy as first-line treatments for unresectable, advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Esophageal cancers continue to confer a dismal prognosis. Targeted and immune therapies have skyrocketed in the world of cancer management. Unlike other solid tumors, esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) has lacked effective targeted therapy. Promising outcomes with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have recently changed ESCC management.

AREAS COVERED

Nivolumab has been granted several approvals to treat ESCC patients. Nivolumab is recommended as adjuvant therapy for localized ESCC patients following trimodality therapy who have residual cancer in the surgical specimen (lymph node(s) and or the primary). CheckMate-648 led to dual ICI therapy approval with nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab plus platinum with fluoropyrimidine as first line treatment for unresectable ESCC patients. ATTRACTION-3 resulted in nivolumab approval for second line therapy of unresectable ESCC patients who have not been exposed to ICI. Here we provide a review of nivolumab and how this relates to ESCC management.

EXPERT OPINION

Some ESCC patients will not experience a response to ICIs. Determining intrinsic and acquired resistance patterns are needed to further capitalize on ICI therapy for ESCC patients. PD-L1 expression has been explored as a potential biomarker. Data shows, however, PD-L1 positive tumor patients benefit but this assessment is not always needed.

A Systematic Evaluation of Cost-Saving Dosing Regimens for Therapeutic Antibodies and Antibody-Drug Conjugates for the Treatment of Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

Expensive novel anticancer drugs put a serious strain on healthcare budgets, and the associated drug expenses limit access to life-saving treatments worldwide.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to develop alternative dosing regimens to reduce drug expenses.

METHODS

We developed alternative dosing regimens for the following monoclonal antibodies used for the treatment of lung cancer: amivantamab, atezolizumab, bevacizumab, durvalumab, ipilimumab, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, and ramucirumab; and for the antibody-drug conjugate trastuzumab deruxtecan. The alternative dosing regimens were developed by means of modeling and simulation based on the population pharmacokinetic models developed by the license holders. They were based on weight bands and the administration of complete vials to limit drug wastage. The resulting dosing regimens were developed to comply with criteria used by regulatory authorities for in silico dose development.

RESULTS

We found that alternative dosing regimens could result in cost savings that range from 11 to 28%, and lead to equivalent pharmacokinetic exposure with no relevant increases in variability in exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

Dosing regimens based on weight bands and the use of complete vials to reduce drug wastage result in less expenses while maintaining equivalent exposure. The level of evidence of our proposal is the same as accepted by regulatory authorities for the approval of alternative dosing regimens of other monoclonal antibodies in oncology. The proposed alternative dosing regimens can, therefore, be directly implemented in clinical practice.

Low-Dose Immunotherapy: Is It Just an Illusion?

The development and use of immunotherapy in the last decade have led to a drastic improvement in results in the onco-haematological field. This has implied, on the one hand, the need for clinicians to manage a new type of adverse event and, on the other hand, a significant increase in costs. However, emerging scientific evidence suggests that, as with other drugs in the recent past, the registry dosage can be drastically reduced for immunotherapies without penalizing their effectiveness. This would also lead to an important reduction in costs, expanding the audience of cancer patients who could access immunotherapy-based treatments. In this “Commentary”, we analyze the available evidence of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics and the most recent literature in favor of low-dose immunotherapy.

A comprehensive regulatory and industry review of modeling and simulation practices in oncology clinical drug development

Exposure-response (E-R) analyses are an integral component in the development of oncology products. Characterizing the relationship between drug exposure metrics and response allows the sponsor to use modeling and simulation to address both internal and external drug development questions (e.g., optimal dose, frequency of administration, dose adjustments for special populations). This white paper is the output of an industry-government collaboration among scientists with broad experience in E-R modeling as part of regulatory submissions. The goal of this white paper is to provide guidance on what the preferred methods for E-R analysis in oncology clinical drug development are and what metrics of exposure should be considered.

Hepatotoxicity of immune checkpoint inhibitors: What is Currently Known

BACKGROUND

This systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed to provide a complete hepatotoxicity profile, hepatotoxicity spectrum, and safety ranking of immune checkpoint inhibitor drugs for cancer treatment.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, Web of Science, psycINFO, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. websites were searched, and a manual search of relevant reviews and trials up to January 1, 2022, was undertaken. Head-to-head III randomized controlled trials comparing any 2 or 3 of the following treatments or different doses of the same immune checkpoint inhibitor drug were included: programmed death 1 (PD-1), programmed death ligand 1, and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) inhibitors and conventional therapy. We included 106 randomized trials (n=164,782) containing 17 treatment arms.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of hepatotoxicity was 4.06%. The rate of fatal liver adverse events was 0.07%. The programmed death ligand 1 inhibitor+targeted therapy drug+chemotherapy group had the highest risk of treatment-related increases in all-grade alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase levels, and the differences were significant. For immune-related hepatotoxicity, no significant difference was found between PD-1 and CTLA-4 inhibitors for all-grade hepatotoxicity; however, CTLA-4 inhibitors were associated with a higher risk of grade 3-5 hepatotoxicity than PD-1 inhibitors.

CONCLUSIONS

The highest incidence of hepatotoxicity and fatality was observed with triple therapy. The overall incidence of hepatotoxicity was similar between different dual regimens. For immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy, the overall risk of immune-mediated hepatotoxicity related to CTLA-4 inhibitors did not differ significantly from that of PD-1 inhibitors. There was no direct relationship between the risk of liver injury and drug dose, whether monotherapy or combination therapy was used.

Population Pharmacokinetics of Nivolumab in Japanese Patients with Nonsmall Cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

Nivolumab is an antiprogrammed death-1 (PD-1) antibody used for immuno-oncological therapy of various cancers, including nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study aimed to characterize the real-world population pharmacokinetics (PK) of nivolumab in patients with NSCLC.

METHODS

PK samples were collected by opportunistic sampling of Japanese patients with NSCLC treated with nivolumab monotherapy. Population PK analysis was performed using a two-compartment model in Nonlinear Mixed Effect Model. Patient-specific factors such as body weight, age, sex, serum albumin, estimated glomerular filtration rate, performance status, programmed cell death receptor ligand 1 expression in tumors, and treatment periods were evaluated as potential covariates for clearance.

RESULTS

A total of 223 serum samples collected from 34 patients were available for analysis. The median (min-max) age and weight were 69 years (38-83 years) and 62.7 kg (36.8-80.5 kg), respectively. The mean (95% confidence interval) clearance estimate was 0.0064 L/h (0.0058-0.0070 L/h). The inclusion of the ALB level, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and treatment period significantly improved the model fit.

CONCLUSIONS

A real-world nivolumab population PK model was developed using an opportunistic sampling strategy in Japanese patients with NSCLC. Further studies are warranted to characterize the exposure-response relationship and determine the optimal dosing regimens for these patients.

First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer, including patients with ECOG performance status 2 and other special populations: CheckMate 817

BACKGROUND

CheckMate 817, a phase 3B study, evaluated flat-dose nivolumab plus weight-based ipilimumab in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, in this research, we report on first-line treatment in patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) 0-1 (cohort A) and special populations (cohort A1: ECOG PS 2; or ECOG PS 0-1 with untreated brain metastases, renal impairment, hepatic impairment, or controlled HIV infection).

METHODS

Cohorts A and A1 received nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was the incidence of grade 3-4 and grade 5 immune-mediated adverse events (IMAEs; adverse events (AEs) deemed potentially immune-related, occurring <100 days of last dose, and treated with immune-modulating medication (except endocrine events)) and treatment-related select AEs (treatment-related AEs with potential immunological etiology requiring frequent monitoring/intervention, reported between first dose and 30 days after the last dose) in cohort A; efficacy endpoints were secondary/exploratory. In cohort A1, safety/efficacy assessment was exploratory.

RESULTS

The most common grade 3-4 IMAEs were pneumonitis (5.1%), diarrhea/colitis (4.9%), and hepatitis (4.6%) in cohort A (N=391) and diarrhea/colitis (3.5%), hepatitis (3.5%), and rash (3.0%) in cohort A1 (N=198). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related select AEs were hepatic (5.9%), gastrointestinal (4.9%), and pulmonary (4.6%) events in cohort A and gastrointestinal (4.0%), skin (3.5%), and endocrine (3.0%) events in cohort A1. No grade 5 IMAEs or treatment-related select AEs occurred. Treatment-related deaths occurred in 4 (1.0%) and 3 (1.5%) patients in cohorts A and A1, respectively. Three-year overall survival (OS) rates were 33.7% and 20.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Flat-dose nivolumab plus weight-based ipilimumab was associated with manageable safety and durable efficacy in cohort A, consistent with data from phase 3 metastatic NSCLC studies. Special populations of cohort A1 including patients with ECOG PS 2 or ECOG PS 0-1 with untreated brain metastases had manageable treatment-related toxicity and clinically meaningful 3-year OS rate.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02869789.

Adjuvant Therapy of Nivolumab Combined With Ipilimumab Versus Nivolumab Alone in Patients With Resected Stage IIIB-D or Stage IV Melanoma (CheckMate 915)

PURPOSE

Ipilimumab and nivolumab have each shown treatment benefit for high-risk resected melanoma. The phase III CheckMate 915 trial evaluated adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus nivolumab alone in patients with resected stage IIIB-D or IV melanoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, phase III trial, 1,833 patients received nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 6 weeks (916 patients) or nivolumab 480 mg once every 4 weeks (917 patients) for ≤ 1 year. After random assignment, patients were stratified by tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and stage. Dual primary end points were recurrence-free survival (RFS) in randomly assigned patients and in the tumor PD-L1 expression-level < 1% subgroup.

RESULTS

At a minimum follow-up of approximately 23.7 months, there was no significant difference between treatment groups for RFS in the all-randomly assigned patient population (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.09; P = .269) or in patients with PD-L1 expression < 1% (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.14). In all patients, 24-month RFS rates were 64.6% (combination) and 63.2% (nivolumab). Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported in 32.6% of patients in the combination group and 12.8% in the nivolumab group. Treatment-related deaths were reported in 0.4% of patients in the combination group and in no nivolumab-treated patients.

CONCLUSION

Nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 6 weeks did not improve RFS versus nivolumab 480 mg once every 4 weeks in patients with stage IIIB-D or stage IV melanoma. Nivolumab showed efficacy consistent with previous adjuvant studies in a population resembling current practice using American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition, reaffirming nivolumab as a standard of care for melanoma adjuvant treatment.

Flat dose regimen of toripalimab based on model-informed drug development approach

Introduction: Flat dosing regimen has recently been approved for programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1) inhibitors including toripalimab, nivolumab and pembrolizumab. The objective of this study is to provide pharmacological evidence for a flat dosing regimen of toripalimab by assessing the efficacy and safety profile of a 240 mg Q3W flat dose relative to the currently approved 3 mg/kg Q2W. Methods: A population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) model was established based on 1,014 evaluable patients in 13 clinical studies. The exposure-objective response rate (ORR, n = 234) and exposure-safety (n = 152) analyses were performed by logistic regression. Three safety endpoints including grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs), treatment-related grade ≥ 3 AEs, and AEs leading to study drug discontinuation were evaluated. Progression-free survival (PFS, n = 234) was evaluated using a Cox proportional hazard model with the Kaplan-Meier survival curve. Results: The PK profiles of toripalimab are best described by a two-compartment model with time-varying clearance characterized by a sigmoidal maximum effect (E_max) function. Simulations for the first dose and steady-state exposures for the 240 mg Q3W dosing regimen were comparable to those for the 3 mg/kg Q2W dosing regimen with 95% exposure coverage ranging from 88% to 96%. The exposure-safety analysis showed that the probability of an adverse event occurring did not increase with increases in toripalimab exposure. A flat exposure-response relationship for ORR was identified. The Kaplan-Meier survival curve showed that exposure was a predictor for PFS; however, no difference in treatment benefit was demonstrated across exposure quantiles using a Cox proportional hazard model. Discussion: This study revealed that toripalimab exposure of 240 mg Q3W dosing regimen was comparable to 3 mg/kg Q2W dosing regimen. The safety and efficacy E-R results of 240 mg Q3W is flat. Hence, the 240 mg Q3W dosing regimen is determined to be a preferred therapeutic dosage for toripalimab due to the convenience of flat dose.

Safety of First-Line Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Patients With Metastatic NSCLC: A Pooled Analysis of CheckMate 227, CheckMate 568, and CheckMate 817

INTRODUCTION

We characterized the safety of first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) in a large patient population with metastatic NSCLC and efficacy outcomes after NIVO+IPI discontinuation owing to treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs).

METHODS

We pooled data from three first-line NIVO+IPI studies (NIVO, 3 mg/kg or 240 mg every 2 wk; IPI, 1 mg/kg every 6 wk) in metastatic NSCLC (CheckMate 227 part 1, CheckMate 817 cohort A, CheckMate 568 part 1). Safety end points included TRAEs and immune-mediated adverse events (IMAEs) in the pooled population and patients aged 75 years or older.

RESULTS

In the pooled population (N = 1255), any-grade TRAEs occurred in 78% of the patients, grade 3 or 4 TRAEs in 34%, and discontinuation of any regimen component owing to TRAEs in 21%. The most frequent TRAE and IMAE were diarrhea (20%; grade 3 or 4, 2%) and rash (17%; grade 3 or 4, 3%), respectively. The most common grade 3 or 4 IMAEs were hepatitis (5%) and diarrhea/colitis and pneumonitis (4% each). Pneumonitis was the most common cause of treatment-related death (5 of 16). Safety in patients aged 75 years or older (n = 174) was generally similar to the overall population, but discontinuation of any regimen component owing to TRAEs was more common (29%). In patients discontinuing NIVO+IPI owing to TRAEs (n = 225), 3-year overall survival was 50% (95% confidence interval: 42.6-56.0), and 42% (31.2-52.4) of 130 responders remained in response 2 years after discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

First-line NIVO+IPI was well tolerated in this large population with metastatic NSCLC and in patients aged 75 years or older. Discontinuation owing to TRAEs did not reduce long-term survival.

Malignant neoplasm of the bronchi and lung: Russian clinical guidelines

удалить

An open label, safety study of Asian patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer receiving second-line nivolumab monotherapy (CheckMate 870)

BACKGROUND

Nivolumab has been approved in China as second-line treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) via weight-based infusion, based on the CheckMate 078 study. We investigated the safety and efficacy of 240 mg flat-dose nivolumab in patients with advanced NSCLC, including those with hepatitis B virus (HBV) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation/ALK receptor tyrosine kinase (ALK) translocation due to high prevalence in China.

METHODS

CheckMate 870 was a single-arm, open-label, phase IIIb trial in Asian (primarily Chinese) patients with previously treated advanced NSCLC. Patients received flat-dose nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) for up to 2 years. The primary endpoint was the incidence and severity of treatment-related select adverse events (TRsAEs) in non-HBV patients; secondary and exploratory endpoints included severity of high-grade TRsAEs in HBV-infected patients, and safety, efficacy and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in the whole population.

RESULTS

Out of 404 patients enrolled, 400 received treatment. Median (standard deviation) age was 60.5 (8.68) years and the majority were male (78.5%). At a median follow-up of 37.6 months, no Grade 5 TRsAEs were reported, and the frequency of Grade 3-4 TRsAEs was low (0.0-5.9%) in non-HBV and HBV NSCLC patients. Median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in all treated patients were 14.7 (12.3-18.1) and 3.6 (2.3-3.8) months, respectively. Median OS was 14.2 (12.3-18.1) and 22.3 (10.0-NA) months for non-HBV and HBV-infected patients, 19.3 (11.2-31.7) and 13.7 (11.5-18.1) months for EGFR-positive and wild-type subgroups, and 19.3 (12.9-23.5) and 13.3 (10.9-17.7) months for those with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression ⩾1% and <1%, respectively. No notable changes from baseline were observed in PROs throughout the study.

CONCLUSION

Nivolumab 240 mg infusion Q2W was well tolerated, efficacious, and maintained health status and quality of life in Asian patients with previously treated advanced NSCLC regardless of HBV, EGFR, or PD-L1 status.

Low-dose nivolumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

Background

The approved dose of nivolumab is 3 mg/kg or a flat dose of 240 mg for indications. There is no dose-response relationship for nivolumab; therefore, a low-dose regimen may be an option to reduce financial toxicity. This study was designed to investigate the efficacy and safety of low-dose nivolumab in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed patients with HCC who received 20 or 100 mg of nivolumab intravenously every 2 weeks. The objective response rate was determined in accordance with the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors criteria version 1.1. The Cox regression model and Kaplan–Meier method were used to analyze hazard factors, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Adverse events (AEs) were assessed according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0.

Results

In total, 78 patients were enrolled, including 49 with hepatitis B virus (HBV) and 23 with hepatitis C virus (HCV). All patients were staged as Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C, and 20 patients were classified as having Child–Pugh classification B (7). Nivolumab 20 mg was an independent prognostic factor for better PFS, and albumin-bilirubin grade 1 was the independent prognostic factor for superior OS in the multivariate analyses. Patients with better HBV (HBV DNA < 500 IU/ml) and HCV (HCV RNA undetectable) controls had superior OS. All AEs were grade 1–2 in severity, and all patients tolerated nivolumab without treatment interruption or dose adjustment. Additionally, 31 patients underwent subsequent therapy after nivolumab treatment.

Conclusion

Low-dose nivolumab may be effective with manageable toxicity and can be an alternative option to reduce financial toxicity in patients with advanced HCC who cannot afford the high cost of immune checkpoint inhibitors in real-world practice.

First-in-Human Phase I/II ICONIC Trial of the ICOS Agonist Vopratelimab Alone and with Nivolumab: ICOS-High CD4 T-Cell Populations and Predictors of Response

PURPOSE

The first-in-human phase I/II ICONIC trial evaluated an investigational inducible costimulator (ICOS) agonist, vopratelimab, alone and in combination with nivolumab in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In phase I, patients were treated with escalating doses of intravenous vopratelimab alone or with nivolumab. Primary objectives were safety, tolerability, MTD, and recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Phase II enriched for ICOS-positive (ICOS+) tumors; patients were treated with vopratelimab at the monotherapy RP2D alone or with nivolumab. Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and predictive biomarkers of response to vopratelimab were assessed.

RESULTS

ICONIC enrolled 201 patients. Vopratelimab alone and with nivolumab was well tolerated; phase I established 0.3 mg/kg every 3 weeks as the vopratelimab RP2D. Vopratelimab resulted in modest objective response rates of 1.4% and with nivolumab of 2.3%. The prospective selection for ICOS+ tumors did not enrich for responses. A vopratelimab-specific peripheral blood pharmacodynamic biomarker, ICOS-high (ICOS-hi) CD4 T cells, was identified in a subset of patients who demonstrated greater clinical benefit versus those with no emergence of these cells [overall survival (OS), P = 0.0025]. A potential genomic predictive biomarker of ICOS-hi CD4 T-cell emergence was identified that demonstrated improvement in clinical outcomes, including OS (P = 0.0062).

CONCLUSIONS

Vopratelimab demonstrated a favorable safety profile alone and in combination with nivolumab. Efficacy was observed only in a subset of patients with a vopratelimab-specific pharmacodynamic biomarker. A potential predictive biomarker of response was identified, which is being prospectively evaluated in a randomized phase II non-small cell lung cancer trial. See related commentary by Lee and Fong, p. 3633.

Population pharmacokinetic models of anti-PD-1 mAbs in patients with multiple tumor types: A systematic review

Aims and background

A number of population pharmacokinetic (PPK) models of anti-programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in multiple tumor types have been published to characterize the influencing factors of their pharmacokinetics. This review described PPK models of anti-PD-1 mAbs that investigate the magnitude and types of covariate effects in PK parameters, provide a reference for building PPK models of other anti-PD-1 mAbs, and identify areas requiring additional research to facilitate the application of PPK models.

Methods

A systematic search for analyses of PPK models of eleven anti-PD-1 mAbs on the market that were carried out in humans was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. The search covered the period from the inception of the databases to April 2022.

Results

Currently, there are fourteen analyses on PPK models of anti-PD-1 mAbs summarized in this review, including seven models that refer to nivolumab, four referring to pembrolizumab, one referring to cemiplimab, one referring to camrelizumab, and one referred to dostarlimab. Most analyses described the pharmacokinetics of anti-PD-1 mAbs with a two-compartment model with time-varying clearance (CL) and a sigmoidal maximum effect. The estimated CL and volume of distribution in the central (V_C) ranged from 0.179 to 0.290 L/day and 2.98 to 4.46 L, respectively. The median (range) of interindividual variability (IIV) for CL and V_C was 30.9% (8.7%–50.8%) and 29.0% (4.32%–40.7%), respectively. The commonly identified significant covariates were body weight (BW) on CL and V_C, and albumin (ALB), tumor type, sex, and performance status (PS) on CL. Other less assessed significant covariates included lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), immunoglobulin G (IgG), ipilimumab coadministration (IPICO) on CL, and body mass index (BMI), malignant pleural mesothelioma (MESO) on V_C.

Conclusion

This review provides detailed information about the characteristics of PPK models of anti-PD-1 mAbs, the effects of covariates on PK parameters, and the current status of the application of the models. ALB, BW, specific tumor type, sex, and PS should be considered for the future development of the PPK model of anti-PD-1 mAbs. Other potential covariates that were assessed less frequently but still have significance (e.g., LDH, IgG, and IPICO) should not be ignored. Thus, further research and thorough investigation are needed to assess new or potential covariates, which will pave the way for personalized anti-PD-1 mAbs therapy.

Real-World nivolumab dosing patterns and safety outcomes in patients receiving adjuvant therapy for melanoma

BACKGROUND

Nivolumab at a dose of 480 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) is approved for the adjuvant treatment of melanoma. However, real-world data on this regimen are limited in this setting.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study utilized data from the US Oncology Network iKnowMed electronic health record database and patient medical charts. Eligible patients were diagnosed with melanoma and received adjuvant nivolumab monotherapy from March to August 2018. Patients were grouped by dosing regimen: cohort 1 (C1), de novo nivolumab 480 mg Q4W; cohort 2 (C2), switched to nivolumab 480 mg Q4W after nivolumab 240 mg or 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W); cohort 3 (C3), de novo nivolumab 3 mg/kg Q2W; or cohort 4 (C4), de novo nivolumab 240 mg Q2W. Patients were followed for up to 12 months. Duration of therapy and safety/tolerability were assessed.

RESULTS

One hundred ninety-one patients were included (C1, n = 40; C2, n = 74; C3, n = 22; C4, n = 55). Duration of therapy was relatively consistent across cohorts (median, 10.3 months; range, 8.3-10.7). Likewise, proportions of patients experiencing treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were similar (range, 54.5%-60.1%), as were the most common events (fatigue, rash, diarrhea, hypothyroidism, nausea, and pruritus). However, proportions experiencing 'significant' TRAEs varied between cohorts. Proportions discontinuing treatment were relatively consistent across cohorts. Propensity score matching and sensitivity analyses generally supported the unadjusted findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Real-world safety profiles of nivolumab 240 mg Q2W and 480 mg Q4W were similar, and both were comparable to the well-documented safety of weight-based dosing (3 mg/kg Q2W), further supporting their approval and use in the adjuvant setting for melanoma.

Safety evaluation of fixed-dose nivolumab in patients with gastric cancer

Background and Aims

This study aimed to examine the safety of fixed‐dose nivolumab.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 113 Japanese patients with gastric cancer who were previously treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy and initiated nivolumab. The endpoints were the incidence of Grade 2 or higher immune‐related adverse events (irAEs) in the conventional dose (3 mg/kg) and fixed‐dose groups (240 mg).

Results

The incidence rates of irAEs in the conventional‐dose and fixed‐dose groups were 29.9% and 19.4%, respectively, and the rates of Grade 2 or higher irAEs were 23.3% and 19.4%, respectively, with no significant difference between the two groups, suggesting that nivolumab at 240 mg is as safe as the 3 mg/kg dose.

Conclusion

This is the first report on the safety of nivolumab at 240 mg in Japanese patients.

Strategies to overcome relapse of immunotherapy-related hepatitis: dose reduction is not the key

INTRODUCTION

Immunotherapy-related hepatitis accounts for 3-6% of all immune-related adverse events (irAE). Reintroduction of checkpoint inhibitors after irAE is matter of debate, weighing the risk of a relapse of adverse events against the possibility of improving disease control. Pharmacokinetic modelling has changed the paradigm of weight-based dosing to flat dose for checkpoint inhibitors, however, it is currently unknown if this poses underweight (<80 kg) patients to a higher risk of toxicity. Weight-based dosing has been opted as a less dangerous and more economic option, especially for underweight patients. Is dose reduction dosing a strategy to permit checkpoint inhibitors reintroduction after immune-related adverse events?

METHODS

We describe a case of checkpoint inhibitor reintroduction after immunotherapy-related hepatitis, with dose reduction based on weight-based dosing (nivolumab 165 mg Q2w) in a patient with metastatic renal cell cancer.

RESULTS

After three cycles, he had a relapse of hepatitis leading to prolonged steroid use and opportunistic infections.

CONCLUSION

Dose reduction in underweight patients is not the preferred strategy to permit rechallenge after immunotherapy-related hepatitis. Exploration of other secondary prevention strategies is warranted.

Evolution of Preclinical Characterization and Insights into Clinical Pharmacology of Checkpoint Inhibitors Approved for Cancer Immunotherapy

Cancer immunotherapy has significantly advanced the treatment paradigm in oncology, with approvals of immuno‐oncology agents for over 16 indications, many of them first line. Checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) are recognized as an essential backbone for a successful anticancer therapy regimen. This review focuses on the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory approvals of major CPIs and the evolution of translational advances since their first approval close to a decade ago. In addition, critical preclinical and clinical pharmacology considerations, an overview of the pharmacokinetic and dose/regimen aspects, and a discussion of the future of CPI translational and clinical pharmacology as combination therapy becomes a mainstay of industrial immunotherapy development and in clinical practice are also discussed.

Melanoma: An immunotherapy journey from bench to bedside

Melanoma gave science a window into the role immune evasion plays in the development of malignancy. The entire spectrum of immune focused anti-cancer therapies has been subjected to clinical trials in this disease, with limited success until the immune checkpoint blockade era. That revolution launched first in melanoma, heralded a landscape change throughout cancer that continues to reverberate today.

Pretreatment body mass index predicts survival among patients administered nivolumab monotherapy for pretreated non-small cell lung cancer

Background

Biomarker assessments for nivolumab monotherapy efficacy in previously treated patients with non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remain unclear. We evaluated whether body mass index (BMI) and Glasgow prognostic score (GPS) are useful for assessing the efficacy of nivolumab alone as a second‐line treatment in patients with pretreated NSCLC.

Methods

Data of 99 patients treated with second‐line nivolumab monotherapy for NSCLC between January 2016 and December 2019 were evaluated for prognostic values of BMI and GPS to assess their usefulness in predicting progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results

The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group‐performance status (PS) independently predicted the second‐line nivolumab monotherapeutic effect; good PS (0–1) correlated with significantly longer PFS (4.3 vs. 1.9 months, log‐rank; p = 0.0004) and OS (17.7 vs. 4.6 months, log‐rank; p < 0.0001) than poor PS. BMI independently predicted survival, with high BMI (≥22.1 kg/m²) associated with significantly longer OS (19.1 vs. 8.5 months, log‐rank; p = 0.0023) than low BMI (<22.1 kg/m²). However, GPS showed no significant difference for PFS or OS.

Conclusion

Among patients with NSCLC treated with nivolumab monotherapy as second‐line treatment, PS was significantly correlated with both PFS and OS and BMI with OS. Thus, BMI could be a useful predictor of survival in these patients.

Model-informed drug development supporting the approval of the avelumab flat-dose regimen in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma

Avelumab is an anti–PD‐L1 monoclonal antibody approved as monotherapy for Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) and urothelial carcinoma (UC), and in combination with axitinib for advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). Although initially approved with weight‐based dosing (10 mg/kg intravenously [IV] every 2 weeks [Q2W]), avelumab was subsequently approved for flat dosing (800 mg IV Q2W) based on population pharmacokinetic (PopPK), exposure‐efficacy, and exposure‐safety modeling in MCC and UC. Here, through modeling and simulation, we provide justification for a flat‐dose regimen of avelumab plus axitinib in aRCC. Simulated exposure metrics from the previous monotherapy PopPK model (1827 patients) for both weight‐based and flat‐dose regimens were compared with exposure metrics from treatment‐naive patients with aRCC who received avelumab plus axitinib (488 patients). The aRCC population exposures were derived from a fit‐for‐purpose PopPK model developed using data from monotherapy and combination studies and the existing base structural PopPK model. Exposure‐response relationships for safety were analyzed, including grade ≥3 treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs), any‐grade infusion‐related reactions, and TEAE any‐grade immune‐related adverse events (irAEs). Weight‐based dosing of avelumab in the aRCC population yielded similar PK exposures to the flat‐dose regimen reference exposures in the monotherapy population. Increased avelumab exposure was not associated with increased probabilities of grade ≥3 TEAEs or any‐grade IRRs, although there was a weak association with an increased probability of any‐grade irAEs. Overall, models in aRCC suggest that the avelumab 800‐mg Q2W flat‐dose regimen would provide similar benefits compared with weight‐based dosing with no meaningful change in the probability of AEs.

Mogamulizumab in Combination with Nivolumab in a Phase I/II Study of Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Solid Tumors

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to determine safety, antitumor activity, and pharmacodynamic profile of mogamulizumab, an anti-CCR4 monoclonal antibody targeting effector regulatory T cells (Treg) in combination with the checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab in patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a multicenter, dose-finding (phase I), and dose expansion (phase II) study (NCT02705105) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors. There were no dose-limiting toxicities in phase I with mogamulizumab 1 mg/kg every week for cycle 1 followed by 1 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks intravenously, and cohort expansion occurred at this dose level.

RESULTS

All 114 patients treated with mogamulizumab 1 mg/kg plus nivolumab 240 mg in phases I (n = 4) and II (n = 110) were assessed for safety and efficacy. Mogamulizumab plus nivolumab showed acceptable safety and tolerability. Objective response rate was 10.5% [95% confidence interval (CI), 5.6-17.7; 3 complete and 9 partial responses]. Disease control rate was 36.8%. Median duration of response was 14.4 months. Median progression-free survival was 2.6 (95% CI, 2.3-3.1) months, and median overall survival was 9.5 (95% CI, 5.9-13.5) months.

CONCLUSIONS

Combination of mogamulizumab with nivolumab for treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors did not result in enhanced efficacy. Tolerability of mogamulizumab 1 mg/kg plus nivolumab 240 mg was acceptable.

Prospective, Noninterventional Study of Nivolumab in Real-world Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Non-small Cell Lung Cancer After Prior Chemotherapy (ENLARGE-Lung)

Nivolumab was the first immune checkpoint inhibitor approved for use in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This noninterventional, prospective cohort study investigates real-world effectiveness of nivolumab in pretreated NSCLC patients in Germany (Enlarge-Lung/CA209-580). Patients with squamous (SQ) or nonsquamous (NSQ) NSCLC previously treated for locally advanced or metastatic (stage IIIB/IV) disease received nivolumab according to the current Summary of Product Characteristics. Overall survival (OS) was the primary endpoint. Of 907 patients enrolled, 660 patients who were followed for at least 12 months across 79 study centers in Germany, were analyzed. Median OS was 11.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 9.1-12.9]; outcomes for the 418 patients with NSQ histology [13.1 mo (95% CI, 10.6-15.6)] were more favorable than outcomes for the 242 patients with SQ histology [8.9 mo (95% CI, 6.4-11.3)]. Patients' age, presence of distant or brain metastases, or line of therapy did not affect outcomes; however, patients with poor performance status (ECOG-PS ≥2, n=80) had shorter median OS [4.7 mo (95% CI, 3.1-5.4)]. This study represents one of the largest real-world cohorts providing outcomes of nivolumab in pretreated NSCLC. The results match well with the published evidence from pivotal clinical trials and demonstrate clinical effectiveness of nivolumab in advanced NSCLC.

Management of adverse events associated with cabozantinib plus nivolumab in renal cell carcinoma: A review

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors have been successfully developed in combination with immune checkpoint inhibitors to treat advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), further advancing treatment. While safety profiles are generally manageable with combination regimens, overlapping adverse events (AEs) and immune-related AEs can make treatment more complex. The CheckMate 9ER study evaluated the tyrosine kinase inhibitor cabozantinib in combination with the anti-programmed cell death protein-1 antibody nivolumab in patients with previously untreated advanced RCC. Cabozantinib + nivolumab demonstrated superiority over sunitinib for progression-free survival, overall survival, and objective response rate. These outcomes supported the approval of cabozantinib + nivolumab as a first-line therapy for advanced RCC. The safety profile was manageable with prophylaxis, supportive care, dose holds and reductions for cabozantinib, and dose holds and immunosuppressive therapy for nivolumab. This review discusses the safety results of CheckMate 9ER and provides guidance on managing some of the more clinically relevant AEs with a focus on overlapping AEs, including diarrhea, elevated amylase/lipase, hepatotoxicity, dermatologic reactions, fatigue, endocrine disorders, and nephrotoxicity. We discuss AE management strategies (prophylaxis, supportive care, dose modification, and immunosuppressive therapy), and provide recommendations for identifying the causative agent of overlapping AEs and for consulting specialists about organ-specific immune-related AEs. Optimizing AE management can maintain tolerability and should be a priority with cabozantinib + nivolumab treatment.

Immune checkpoint-targeted antibodies: a room for dose and schedule optimization?

Anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitors are therapeutic monoclonal antibodies that do not target cancer cells but are designed to reactivate or promote antitumor immunity. Dosing and scheduling of these biologics were established according to conventional drug development models, even though the determination of a maximum tolerated dose in the clinic could only be defined for anti-CTLA-4. Given the pharmacology of these monoclonal antibodies, their high interpatient pharmacokinetic variability, the actual clinical benefit as monotherapy that is observed only in a specific subset of patients, and the substantial cost of these treatments, a number of questions arise regarding the selected dose and the dosing interval. This review aims to outline the development of these immunotherapies and considers optimization options that could be used in clinical practice.

Immunotherapy for Melanoma

Melanoma is the leading cause of death from skin cancer and is responsible for over 7000 deaths in the USA each year alone. For many decades, limited treatment options were available for patients with metastatic melanoma; however, over the last decade, a new era in treatment dawned for oncologists and their patients. Targeted therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors represents an important cornerstone in the treatment of metastatic melanoma; however, this chapter carefully reviews the past and current therapy options available, with a significant focus on immunotherapy-based approaches. In addition, we provide an overview of the results of recent advances in the adjuvant setting for patients with resected stage III and stage IV melanoma, as well as in patients with melanoma brain metastases. Finally, we provide a brief overview of the current research efforts in the field of immuno-oncology for melanoma.

Exposure-Response Analysis to Support Nivolumab Once Every 4 Weeks Dosing in Combination with Cabozantinib in Renal Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSE

A benefit:risk assessment for a less-frequent nivolumab 480 mg Q4W + cabozantinib 40 mg QD dosing regimen was predicted using modeling and simulation of clinical trial data from nivolumab monotherapy studies and from the nivolumab 240 mg Q2W + cabozantinib 40mg QD dosing regimen, which demonstrated clinical benefit versus sunitinib in previously untreated advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) in the phase III CheckMate 9ER trial (NCT03141177).

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Multivariable Cox proportional-hazards analyses were conducted using nivolumab monotherapy data in previously treated aRCC and data from CheckMate 9ER to evaluate progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and grade {greater than or equal to}2 immune-mediated adverse events (IMAEs).

RESULTS

Nivolumab 240 mg Q2W + cabozantinib versus nivolumab showed improvement in PFS (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.31-0.47), OS (HR, 0.63 95% CI, 0.46-0.85), and increased risk of grade {greater than or equal to}2 IMAEs (HR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.79-2.67). Nivolumab exposure was not a predictor of PFS/OS or grade {greater than or equal to}2 IMAEs. Lower nivolumab clearance, male sex, higher baseline bodyweight, and Karnofsky performance (100) were each associated with PFS/OS improvements. Region and IMDC poor score were negative OS predictors. Age, baseline albumin, and programmed death ligand-1 status were not significant PFS/OS predictors. Cabozantinib was a significant grade {greater than or equal to}2 IMAE predictor, driven by diarrhea and hepatic events. Model-predicted PFS/OS and grade {greater than or equal to}2 IMAE rates were similar (<2.5% difference) for nivolumab 240 mg Q2W + cabozantinib and 480 mg Q4W + cabozantinib.

CONCLUSIONS

Comparable benefit:risk was predicted for nivolumab 480 mg Q4W + cabozantinib and nivolumab 240 mg Q2W + cabozantinib.

Low-Dose Radiotherapy Reverses Tumor Immune Desertification and Resistance to Immunotherapy

Developing strategies to inflame tumors is critical for increasing response to immunotherapy. Here, we report that low-dose radiotherapy (LDRT) of murine tumors promotes T-cell infiltration and enables responsiveness to combinatorial immunotherapy in an IFN-dependent manner. Treatment efficacy relied upon mobilizing both adaptive and innate immunity and depended on both cytotoxic CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells. LDRT elicited predominantly CD4⁺ cells with features of exhausted effector cytotoxic cells, with a subset expressing NKG2D and exhibiting proliferative capacity, as well as a unique subset of activated dendritic cells expressing the NKG2D ligand RAE1. We translated these findings to a phase I clinical trial administering LDRT, low-dose cyclophosphamide, and immune checkpoint blockade to patients with immune-desert tumors. In responsive patients, the combinatorial treatment triggered T-cell infiltration, predominantly of CD4⁺ cells with Th1 signatures. Our data support the rational combination of LDRT with immunotherapy for effectively treating low T cell-infiltrated tumors. SIGNIFICANCE: Low-dose radiation reprogrammed the tumor microenvironment of tumors with scarce immune infiltration and together with immunotherapy induced simultaneous mobilization of innate and adaptive immunity, predominantly CD4⁺ effector T cells, to achieve tumor control dependent on NKG2D. The combination induced important responses in patients with metastatic immune-cold tumors.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1.

Use and Toxicity of Checkpoint Inhibitors for Solid Tumor Treatment in a Veteran Population

Background

New immunotherapy agents have provided additional options for the treatment of a variety of malignancies, including the programmed death 1 (PD-1) protein inhibitors nivolumab and pembrolizumab. Initial dosing was based on patient weight, but subsequent studies supported fixed dosing, thereby prompting a change in US Food and Drug Administration-approved dosing. Depending on patient weight, one dosing strategy may be more cost-effective than another; thereby, a combination of dosing strategies may be beneficial for institutions. While these agents have been shown to be efficacious, they have been associated with immune-related adverse events (IrAEs). The purpose of this study was to determine the dosing strategy used and identify actual and potential cost savings, as well as to determine the incidence of hypothyroidism with PD-1 inhibitors in patients of the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

Methods

This was a retrospective chart review of VA patients who received a PD-1 inhibitor for the treatment of a solid tumor between January 2015 and July 2017. Data were collected from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse through the VA Informatics and Computing Infrastructure. The dosing strategy for a PD-1 inhibitor was categorized into weight-based vs fixed-dosing where possible and used to identify actual and potential cost-savings opportunities. Thyroid laboratory values and levothyroxine prescriptions were evaluated to determine the overall incidence of the prespecified IrAEs. Descriptive statistics were used for primary and secondary outcomes.

Results

Nivolumab was the primary PD-1 inhibitor used for solid tumor treatment. Both nivolumab and pembrolizumab were primarily dosed based on patient weight. Nivolumab orders resulted in $8,514,300 estimated actual cost savings with $5,591,250 estimated missed cost savings identified. Of the patients who received nivolumab, 3249 patients were evaluated for thyroid dysfunction; 514 (15.8%) developed primary hypothyroidism based on laboratory values and levothyroxine prescription data.

Conclusions

Utilization of a combination of both weight-based and fixed-dosing strategies for nivolumab has the potential for cost savings, thereby benefiting the health care institution. The incidence of IrAEs identified among patients who received PD-1 inhibitor within the VA health care system was similar to the incidences reported in published literature. This further supports recommendations for close IrAE monitoring and treatment.

JME-001 phase II trial of first-line combination chemotherapy with cisplatin, pemetrexed, and nivolumab for unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma

Background

JME-001 is a phase II trial assessing the efficacy and safety of cisplatin, pemetrexed, and nivolumab as first-line therapy in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM).

Patients and methods

Patients with untreated, unresectable MPM with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of 0–1 were included. The primary endpoint is the centrally reviewed objective response rate. The secondary endpoints include (1) response rate assessed by investigators, (2) disease control rate, (3) overall survival, (4) progression-free survival, (5) duration of response, and (6) time to response. Safety and adverse events will also be evaluated. Cisplatin (75 mg/m²), pemetrexed (500 mg/m²), and nivolumab (360 mg/body) were administered intravenously every 3 weeks with a total of 4–6 cycles. If patients did not progress during the combination phase, maintenance therapy with nivolumab was administered until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Tissue samples were required and collected for programmed death ligand 1 analysis.

Results

Eighteen patients (mean age 69.2 years, 15 men) were enrolled between January 2018 and May 2019. The ECOG PS was 0 in 3 patients and 1 in 15 patients. Fourteen (77.8%; 95% CI 52.4% to 93.6%) patients had an objective response. The disease control rate was 94.4% (95% CI 72.7% to 99.9%). Fourteen (77.8%) patients had partial response (PR), three had stable disease, and one was not evaluable. Tumor shrinkage was observed in 10/14 (71.4%) patients with epithelioid, and 2/2 (100%) patients with sarcomatoid or biphasic histological subtype had PR. Ten (55.6%) patients experienced grade 3 or worse adverse events, including disorder of metabolism or nutrition (33.3%), loss of appetite (27.8%), anemia (16.7%), and hyponatremia (11.1%). No treatment-related deaths occurred.

Conclusions

The safety and efficacy of this study strongly support a definitive trial of this combination.

Trial registration number

UMIN000030892.

Encorafenib, binimetinib plus pembrolizumab triplet therapy in patients with advanced BRAFV600 mutant melanoma: safety and tolerability results from the phase I IMMU-TARGET trial

BACKGROUND

Combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway inhibitors (MAPKi) has been proposed to enhance the durability of anti-tumour responses induced by MAPKi. Here, we present phase I safety results from an open-label, phase I/II study of pembrolizumab (PEM), encorafenib (ENC) and binimetinib (BIN) triplet therapy in advanced, B-Raf proto-oncogene serine/threonine kinase (BRAF)V600-mutated melanoma (IMMU-TARGET, NCT02902042).

METHODS

The dose finding phase I part used a 3 + 3 design, starting with the approved doses of PEM (200 mg every three weeks), ENC (450 mg once daily [QD]) and BIN (45 mg twice daily [BID]) as dose level (DL) 0. Reduction of the ENC and BIN doses (300 mg QD and 30 mg BID at DL-1 and 200 mg QD and 30 mg BID at DL-2) was preplanned in case of ≥2 dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). Primary objectives were to estimate the recommended phase II dose of the triplet combination, DLT and safety. As per the sponsor's decision, the study was terminated after the phase I part, as the clinical efficacy of the combination is currently being investigated in a pivotal, placebo-controlled (PEM mono), double-blinded phase III trial (STARBOARD,NCT04657991).

RESULTS

Fifteen patients were enrolled. DLTs of DL0 were creatine phosphokinase (CPK) elevation plus cytokine release syndrome (n = 1) and gamma glutamyl transferase (GGT) increase (n = 1). No DLT was observed in further 3 + 3 patients at DL-1. One (isolated GGT elevations) DLT of DL0 was questionable, as the patient had further episodes of isolated GGT elevations after treatment discontinuation. Hence, further 6 patients were enrolled at DL0: here, no DLT occurred. In total, 13 of 15 patients (87%) experienced a treatment-related adverse event (TRAE) and 8 patients (53%), a grade ≥III TRAE; there were no TRAE-related deaths. Increases in aspartate aminotransferases, GGT (6/15 patients) and CPK elevations (4/15) were the most common grade III-IV TRAE. In median, patients received triplet therapy for 24 weeks (interquartile range [IQR], 12-45). Of the 14 patients evaluable for efficacy, the overall response rate was 64% (95% confidence interval [CI], 35-87). At a median follow-up of 25 months (IQR, 9-28), progression-free survival at 12 months was 41% (95% CI, 13-68).

CONCLUSIONS

Triplet therapy with PEM, ENC and BIN as used in the study was feasible and safe and led to clinically meaningful disease control.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor use in patients with end-stage kidney disease: an analysis of reported cases and literature review

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), immunomodulatory antibodies that are used to enhance the immune system, have substantially improved the prognosis of patients with advanced malignancy. As the use of ICI therapy becomes increasingly widespread across different types of cancer, their use in patients receiving dialysis is likely to increase. In this review we summarize the current literature on the use of ICIs in end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients and provide aggregate data from reported cases and series. Based on available pharmacological information, ICIs require no dosing adjustment in ESKD patients. Analysis of the reported cases in the literature demonstrates a similar incidence of immune-related adverse events in patients with ESKD receiving dialysis as compared with the general population (49%). Severe reactions graded as 3 and 4 have been seen in 15 patients (16%). As such, it is important that these patients are monitored very closely for immune-related adverse events; however, the risk of these adverse events should not preclude patients on dialysis from receiving these therapies. Cancer remission (complete and partial) was seen in close to 30% of patients, stable disease was seen in 28% and progression of disease in ∼36%. One-third of the patients died. Urothelial and renal cell cancer represented approximately half of all treated cancers and accounted for ∼50% of all deaths reported. Additional data in the dialysis population with the use of ICIs and involvement in prospective studies are needed to better assess outcomes, particularly within specific cancer types.

Cabozantinib and nivolumab as first-line treatment in advanced renal cell carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

In the last decade, there have been substantial changes in the management of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) with combined regimens with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) replacing targeted therapies. These combined regimens include the combination of cabozantinib plus nivolumab.

AREAS COVERED

Here, we provide an overview of clinical trials evaluating the combination of cabozantinib and nivolumab and the current clinical data on mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety profile.

EXPERT OPINION

Dual immune checkpoint inhibition with nivolumab and ipilimumab as well as the combination of a vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor and an immune checkpoint inhibitor have shown to improve outcomes in phase III trials in comparison to sunitinib (axitinib plus pembrolizumab, axitinib plus avelumab, bevacizumab plus atezolizumab, cabozantinib plus nivolumab, lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab). However, to date, there are no head-to-head trials comparing these new combination therapies and no biomarkers are available to guide the optimal choice of first line therapy.

Re-Evaluating the Effects of Obesity on Cancer Immunotherapy Outcomes in Renal Cancer: What Do We Really Know?

Obesity has reached global epidemic proportions and its effects on interactions between the immune system and malignancies, particularly as related to cancer immunotherapy outcomes, have come under increasing scrutiny. Although the vast majority of pre-clinical murine studies suggest that host obesity should have detrimental effects on anti-tumor immunity and cancer immunotherapy outcomes, the opposite has been found in multiple retrospective human studies. As a result, acceptance of the "obesity paradox" paradigm, wherein obesity increases cancer risk but then improves patient outcomes, has become widespread. However, results to the contrary do exist and the biological mechanisms that promote beneficial obesity-associated outcomes remain unclear. Here, we highlight discrepancies in the literature regarding the obesity paradox for cancer immunotherapy outcomes, with a particular focus on renal cancer. We also discuss multiple factors that may impact research findings and warrant renewed research attention in future studies. We propose that specific cancer patient populations may be affected in fundamentally different ways by host obesity, leading to divergent effects on anti-tumor immunity and/or immunotherapy outcomes. Continued, thoughtful analysis of this critical issue is therefore needed to permit a more nuanced understanding of the complex effects of host obesity on cancer immunotherapy outcomes in patients with renal cancer or other malignancies.

Impacts of cachexia progression in addition to serum IgG and blood lymphocytes on serum nivolumab in advanced cancer patients

PURPOSE

Serum nivolumab concentrations exhibit a large variation in cancer patients. Cancer cachexia inducing systemic inflammation promotes the elimination of endogenous proteins, while its association with serum nivolumab remains unclear. The present study aimed to evaluate the impacts of cachexia progression in addition to blood components on serum nivolumab in cancer patients.

METHODS

Thirty-eight non-small-cell lung cancer or renal cell cancer patients receiving biweekly intravenous nivolumab were enrolled. Blood samples were collected just before dosing at the 7th administration of nivolumab or later. Serum nivolumab together with serum proteins, inflammatory markers, and peripheral blood leukocytes were determined. Cancer cachexia was classified using the Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS). Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were monitored during the study period.

RESULTS

Cancer patients had a large variation in serum nivolumab concentrations (interquartile range, 12-21 µg/mL per mg/kg). The serum nivolumab concentration was positively correlated with serum albumin, while negatively associated with serum globulin and immunoglobulin G (IgG). A negative correlation was observed between serum nivolumab and blood lymphocytes. Regarding cachexia progression, the patients with GPS 2 had a higher serum interleukin-6 concentration and a lower serum nivolumab concentration than those with GPS 0 or 1. The GPS, serum IgG, and blood lymphocytes were identified as independent variables for serum nivolumab. The incidence of irAEs was not associated with the nivolumab dose or serum nivolumab.

CONCLUSION

Cachexia progression had a negative impact on serum nivolumab in cancer patients. The interindividual variation in serum nivolumab was characterized by cachexia progression in addition to blood components.